OT: Top Posting

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob

A while ago I inquired in another (non-MS) group why everyone bottom-posted,
noting that top-posting had the advantage of placing what you want to read at
the top, instead of forcing you to locate the beginning of the response
somewhere in the middle of the message, which often requires scrolling. Top
posting is quite common here.

In answer I got a storm of hostile responses. They said top posters should have
their messages ignored, that I was a newbie, retarded, clearly a troll. Some
cited official sources such as Usenet FAQs, which do say that top-posting should
be avoided (though I did not find the reasons persuasive). One even said
Microsoft discourages it in their newsgroups. Is this true?

Bob
 
Was that NG Comp.OS.Linux.Advocacy by any chance? They seem to think the
two worst sins in the world (other than not including some remark
disparaging MS in each post) are 1) Using Outlook Express 2) Top Posting.
How either of these are somehow worse than being a total jerk to people just
looking for help is beyond me, but to each there own I guess. Anyway, I
think if you flip through these newsgroups I think it's safe to assume that
no one gets too uptight one way or another and many MS Employees and MVP's
top post (and many people with better things to do with their time then
flame people who don't post like they do seem to like it - I know I prefer
it).
 
I personally agree top-posting is more efficient. The classic argument against it- it makes you read a conversation thread in reverse- only applies if you don't remember what the conversation was, which I find usually isn't the case. I'd rather pay the cost of reading in reverse from time to time than have to scroll to the bottom of every message I read, when 99% of the time it's wasted effort
 
In answer I got a storm of hostile responses.
Must have tried a sip COLA, eh? :>)

I usually just go with the flow. If the norm in the group is to top-post, I
top-post. Otherwise, I'll bottom-post.

What's really annoying, is when someone posts a message, the reply to that
is bottom-posted, then the next reply is top-posted, then on and on..... top
& bottom, top & bottom.

Bob Lehmann
 
I agree Bob, that can make your eyes cross.

But I frequent a lot of newsgroups. Some of them have an "always top"
style, others "always bottom." I, too, go with what is usual for that
group.

Bottom posting is just dandy if you trim the original down to about a 1/2
page before responding. It is somewhat tedious if they simply leave
everything that was originally there.
 
Bob said:
In answer I got a storm of hostile responses. They said top posters should have
their messages ignored, that I was a newbie, retarded, clearly a troll. Some
cited official sources such as Usenet FAQs, which do say that top-posting should
be avoided (though I did not find the reasons persuasive). One even said
Microsoft discourages it in their newsgroups. Is this true?

Bob
Click to expand...

There are groups where cross-posting is flamed. Groups where HTML is
flamed.

Others where appropriate cross-posting encouraged. Others where HTML is
common.

It apparently takes all kinds.
 
Back
Top